Ramble Involving Personal Journalist Ethics & Other Random Stuff

...Well, so much for "This blog will not be updated after my next article"!

So yeah, some of you reading this may be wondering where the free video game review for this week is.

Honest truth? I looked over Steam on Sunday, having just got my internet back, and all I saw were a bunch of MMO style games that required a multiplayer audience. And, I’m not going to lie, I felt sick of it. I get why these games exist, but I’m sick of constantly having to hunt down free games, saying the same thing over and over again while the vast majority of developers just keep doing the same things again and again. With music, it doesn’t feel like a chore for me (I love learning about new bands and hearing new stuff, so I’m not going to burn out doing that any time soon!), but, with video games, I just feel like I’m scraping the bottom of the barrel. You could fairly put this down to exasperation that there was no quick and easy game to cover after a week that mostly comprised me furiously trying to do what I want to do, but, well...there’s more to this story.

I’ve talked several times in the past about my former editor for the site The Unheard Voices (I will not reveal her name out of respect to her privacy, especially considering she has left the internet over the course of the last week) and, while I’ve gone in a direction that I imagine she might not approve of due to me focusing on receiving promos over the last few months while she has always focused on independent reviewing, I have always kept to the spirit of the journalistic ethics that she taught me about: do the research from respectable sources which can be verified, do not accept gifts in exchange for review copies or to change a review, show respect to those being covered, interviewed or worked alongside regardless of gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic background, etc. and stuff like that. One could argue that receiving promo copies of albums is arguably bending the rules a bit, considering my role on the site is not purely administrative or PR focused, and I would concede that a fair point is being made if such a point is raised, but I would also counter that being an independent reviewer means that you have to blur the lines between being a reviewer, PR person, administrative figure and editor. You have to be a one man company and you have to be able to operate with the professionalism one would expect from such a definition, so it is not entirely fair to run on the logic that being an independent reviewer means you cannot also receive promo copies of albums.

Some may notice that I deliberately refer to myself as a reviewer as opposed to being a journalist. This is not to say that I do not find non-review content enjoyable to do or could not do it: I just feel that my bread and butter are reviews, as they do not require much beyond a laptop with writing software and music playing software on them and, if you’re researching the band being covered, access to the internet. You could fairly argue that I am basically a journalist, but I personally feel the distinction to be an important and valuable one, as “reviewer” implies that the core of my writing is reviews (which it is) while “journalist” implies that the core of my writing is information based pieces (which I have done in the past, but they do not comprise the majority of what I write by any measure, unless you decide to be a bit nitpicky and say that a review is technically an information based piece in that I’m informing a reader about an album and my personal thoughts on it).

However, I digress.

Part of the reason I opted to write this article rather than force myself to play yet another multiplayer game I had no interest in is due to something my former editor posted on her website (which is unlikely to ever be updated from now on due to the wording of it making it fairly clear that she has no intention of returning to writing, but I’m still going to keep the link to the article to myself out of respect for her privacy). To make a long story short, she stated that she has grown tired of how the still-ongoing GamerGate controversy has brought out some of the worst aspects of journalists today. To quote from a section of her post:

Gaming journalism, at it’s core, isn’t a bad thing, but it is lost and rotten. It needed to start fresh and new.

So far this year I’ve had my name slandered, I’ve been doxxed, I’ve been stalked, I’ve had to get the police involved in my life, I’ve been nearly driven to suicide, and at the end of it what did I find?

That as long as someone panders to the reader they’ll get the ad revenue they need. They’ll get the money they need. They’ll get the popularity they need. It doesn’t matter what side of the aisle they’re on. Sadly, from this journalist’s perspective, it’s all the same. Just one side yelling at another, and it’s exhausted me.

...I find myself hating it again. Hating the writing. Hating trying to change things. Hating wanting things to be better and finding that if I’m not slinging shit, then I’m considered an unethical journalist somehow. That I must be on the side of the “liberal media” because I refuse to take a side when it comes to reporting the truth.

The long and short of it is: I remember now why I got out of writing in the first place. Because it creates the worst kind of hollow place inside of me to watch something I love become some monster that I don’t recognise.

How much of that you’ll agree with, if any, will boil down to how much you’ve been paying attention to the gaming scene in the last two years. I have already made it very obvious where I stand on GamerGate in the past (I hate the unpleasant behaviour on both sides, but both sides are raising valid points that I feel are unfair to ignore entirely), but the thing that I feel is worrying is that it’s been two years since the GamerGate controversy started to dominate Twitter (for gamers, at least) and yet it hasn’t burnt itself out. It’s still violently ongoing now, and it’s very easy to sit here and wonder whether there is ANYONE in the gaming media who has even an ounce of common sense or journalistic integrity. While there are good independent voices out there who refuse to take a side on the matter, the majority of games journalist sites seem just happy to have a regular source of content with which to exploit for financial gain (if not in the articles, then in the sheer number of people returning to the site to keep the angry arguments about the debate going and counting as page clicks for ad revenue as a result).

Speaking as someone who has done his best to avoid taking a side (one could probably argue that I lean more being anti-GamerGate due to my habit of mistrusting GamerGate as a result of unpleasant incidents related to them, but the journalistic ethic points they raise are ones I find myself in agreement with, so you could equally argue that I lean towards being pro-GamerGate), I feel that this is absolutely deplorable behaviour, and I find myself feeling that the games media and gamers themselves should be doing more to finally put this ongoing controversy to rest. The games media, if necessary, should have a hardline “no GG discussions” rule, not to prevent the discussions from happening, but to avoid profiting off of a controversy that does not need to have practically become a financial lifeline for some places, and gamers should stop screaming at each other and take a few seconds to go “What are they ACTUALLY saying and is it actually important, regardless of the source of it?” instead of going “You’re not on my side, so shut the fuck up!” and continuing the argument all because they go for the knee jerk reaction that is so immature and childish.

Is that too much to ask? Well, I don’t see anyone trying to meet the other side in the middle or saying “You know what? I am not on your side, but you’re right!”, so draw your own conclusions from that.

That, however, is not what the core of this article is about. While this was certainly a factor in my disgust at how the games media has descended into childish mud slinging and has made me VERY strongly inclined to drop doing video game reviews entirely out of protest at being part of a gaming scene like this one (I won’t do that, but this week’s lack of a review will NOT be caught up upon, as I feel speaking my mind is more important on this one than the review would have been), it also made me stop and think on the album promos I get and made me ask myself what my ethics are for journalism.

At the end of the day, I do the music reviews I do because I love music. It isn’t exactly a job for me (I don’t get paid to do the reviews I do), but it is fair to say that I blur the lines a bit between enthusiastic amateur reviewer and unpaid professional reviewer. Part of this is actually somewhat justified, as I would really like to be a professional music reviewer, but I also like the flexibility that independence offers which I wouldn’t get if I was working for, say, Metal Hammer: I don’t have to worry too much about ad revenue being pulled if I say I dislike an album that the magazine has been hyping up or being fired for saying an album didn’t do anything for me, I can allow myself opportunities to explore other genres of music which I wouldn’t normally be allowed to talk about if I worked for a genre specific site (I still like folk and country music when I’m not listening to metal and I can quite enjoy funk and disco when I hear them) and it gives me the ability to separate my writing from my personal life in a way which being a member of Metal Hammer’s review staff probably wouldn’t if I find it gets overwhelming or that I need a break.

The important thing, for me, is my ethics. While it is easy to take the viewpoint that being independent means that I have no rules to tie me down, I’d argue that being an independent journalist requires you to actually be able to follow the same rules that you would if you were in a professional environment, but without the supervision that the professional environment has built into it. So what I’m going to do is spell out my ethics, if only so that people know what rules I operate under. 

• I do not make cheap shots that have deliberate malice behind them. I will occasionally make digs towards artists, but they’re either easy targets who I have no personal dislike against (usually, they’re just not to my taste, but nothing I actively dislike) or they’re actually artists who I like and felt the dig against would be amusing to those who actually know me.
• I do not deliberately make political or religious comments unless they are relevant to what I am covering. I have no interest in politics and religion and, as such, it is not my place to force my viewpoints on them onto other people. I am a music critic, not a political/religious commentator, and to talk about them as if I was without it being relevant to what I am reviewing would be wrong.
• I respect those who disagree with me on my assessment of something, providing they show me the same respect. I am not an endless fountain of knowledge, do make mistakes and have my own personal likes and dislikes, so, if I post something which is flawed due to not showing awareness of a detail which is vital to shaping an opinion on something, post something which is based on errors or post something where my personal likes and dislikes have unfairly tainted my opinion on something, you are allowed to respectfully explain what you think I’ve done wrong and I will consider whether to adjust the article in light of the new evidence.
• I do not share details which I feel are confidential or will be used to justify hatred towards someone, nor do I talk about private details related to someone without making sure that their right to privacy is respected.
• If I cover anything which I received a promo copy of, I disclose this and reveal the source of the copy.
• I treat those who provide promo copies with respect, even if I don’t necessarily show it in my emails. This could be argued as being a business move in some viewpoints, but I know that PR companies and the like have to work hard to get the albums they do and work hard to provide them to critics and yet the vast majority of them receive no recognition for their work among most people. To me, though, their work is part of the glue that holds the music industry together and I will never take their work for granted.
• I treat promo copies with the strictest of confidentiality and do not disclose what I have received as a promo to anyone who is not a member of the site until the review goes up.
• If I perceive a conflict of interest in relation an article that I am working on, I will cease work on the article and pass it along to someone else. If I have to do the article, I will disclose the conflict of interest.
• I do not accept bribes. Not even if the bribe is asking me to do something I was going to do anyway.
• I will never accept a promo if a condition is attached to it that will influence my review UNLESS that condition matches what I was expecting to say anyway and is not one that is open for abuse (so, I may accept a promo requesting I give a 6/10 minimum for early publication if the later deadline is still more than a week before the album’s release, the material provided indicates that I will really like the record anyway and the band is one which I have not been disappointed by in the past). Even then, I will disclose the conditions attached to the promo and urge readers to wait for the later reviews to be sure that my voice is not a part of the minority of critics.
• I NEVER treat a poor record as an excuse to hate an artist, nor do I regard popularity as a factor in the expected quality of a record. 

That’s basically all the rules I follow regarding my journalist stuff boiled down in a nutshell. Some people may be asking “Why have those rules?”

Quite simply, because I know what a professional critic has to be like and I want to be like them. I also want to be better than the critics who use their reviews to spout their own opinions on completely unrelated topics at the expense of the actual review (...no, that’s not a dig against Moviebob, why do you ask?) or fill their reviews with vitriol purely because what they’re hearing isn’t a flawless masterpiece of virtuoso, genre defying performances (generic just means that what is being played follows the expected rules of the genre, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing: one can be completely unoriginal and still highly enjoyable, after all!).

I also hold those rules because I want to be taken seriously. Let’s face it, in the internet age, anyone can claim to be a reviewer and anyone can do so through playing up everything wrong with a product. But pointing out what a product does right and wrong and how to improve it for its target audience is actually more in line with what a real critic is, as a critic doesn’t go into something wanting to hunt down flaws or poke fun at it: they want to see how it holds up for what it is, pointing out what it does well and what it doesn’t do well. To point out an obvious bit of internet stuff for people: the Angry Video Game Nerd and the Nostalgia Critic are NOT what a serious critic should be (in fact, both of their creators, James Rolfe and Doug Walker, have outright said that they’re not meant to be serious critics, with the former even being a parody of gamers who complain about everything with games).

So yeah, hopefully this ramble will have proven a few things.

...Don’t worry, I will be doing the Free Video Game Review for next week, regardless of what I have to cover for it. I just needed to get this out of my system!

Free Video Game Reviews: Electric Highways

Note to blog readers: this article is a catch up of an article that was meant to go up on my site, https://nerdcircleonline.wordpress.com/. If you wish to continue reading articles by me, you might want to move over to reading the site, as the likeliness is that this blog isn't going to be updated after this article. With that said, I will NOT be taking the blog down and I will make sure it stays online should I be informed that it is due to be taken down, so you do not have to move over to the site if you don't want to.

Before I start this review, I must state that this game falls somewhat under the interactive experience banner of gaming: there’s nothing that you have to fight or kill and, for the most part, the only interactivity in the game is you moving around the game world. Because of this, it is surprisingly hard to critique this game fairly: the controls aren’t important, the difficulty isn’t important...heck, there isn’t even a story to speak of, really. All that really comprises the story is that a developer of a programme decides to give it one last go before it goes out live and...that’s about it.

Yeah, basically, all I can talk about with this game is the art style, my personal thoughts on the experience and mention a few minor issues I had with it. So this isn’t going to be a traditional review per se, more a recounting of my experience with the game. Take this for what it’s worth and consider that before you judge whether this game will be for you or not.

So, when I opened this game, I was expecting a somewhat surreal experience based more than a bit on Minecraft’s style of play (so, first person gaming with a focus on an pixel style) and...well, I definitely got the Minecraft bit, but the surreal part, if possible, went beyond what I was expecting. Part of it is the art style, which goes for a futuristic look that can, on occasion, result in some surprisingly impressive design work that goes beyond what you would expect from something that looks like something you’d expect to see in Minecraft. It’s also interesting because it goes for a 3D style, but in the Doom vein of things as opposed to, well, full on 3D. It’s really quite interesting to look at and I think that it’s pulled off surprisingly well.

The overall experience I had with this game can be best summed up as “...If this is what I’m seeing while sober, I hate to think what this would look like while you’re high”, as the whole experience of playing through the game had so many moments where I was wondering what I was looking at and finding the whole thing surprisingly intense. The standout section in this regard is easily the section where you’re in a dungeon, as it FELT like something out of an indie horror game, and even had a small moment where I went “...Well, THAT’S not creepy in the slightest!”

There are a few minor issues I did notice with the game, though. There are occasions where I was able to walk through stuff that I’m fairly sure was meant to be a solid object, the frame rate slowed down a little bit during the second to last section of the game (although I am playing on a fairly unimpressive laptop, so this is probably my laptop’s fault as opposed to a problem with the game) and it’s not a very long experience (around half an hour or so). However, none of those really detracted from the game much. Sure, I found them to be issues, but, overall, they didn’t damage the experience of the game at all. I don’t see the game having a lot of replayability, but, considering I am still wondering what I saw when this is going up, I think the impact it leaves more than makes up for it!

Overall, this is a very interesting game to experience. If you have a spare hour or so, download this game and give it a go. I can’t say it’ll win any game of the year awards, but it’s something you kind of have to see.

Free Video Game Review: Narcissu 1st & 2nd

Note to blog readers: this article is a catch up of an article that was meant to go up on my site, https://nerdcircleonline.wordpress.com/. If you wish to continue reading articles by me, you might want to move over to reading the site, as the likeliness is that this blog isn't going to be updated after I've published the catch up articles over the next month. With that said, I will NOT be taking the blog down and I will make sure it stays online should I be informed that it is due to be taken down, so you do not have to move over to the site if you don't want to.

...I never thought I’d do a short review that seems like a “get out of jail free” comment, but this visual novel...damn it, this visual novel nearly made me cry my eyes out. It’s just...god, it’s so heartbreaking and yet so touching that I don’t feel I can say much about it without getting choked up about it.

OK, to boil this visual novel down to the basics, it is basically two visual novels crammed into one. The first part is the story of two hospital patients who escape from what can be basically summed up as a death ward (you go to it if you have illnesses which can’t be treated, but which aren’t contagious, and you are basically there to die) and traveling across Japan. And it is easily one of the saddest things you will ever read, as you really get connected to the two characters over the course of their adventure and the moment when one of them chooses to simply walk into the ocean and die due to her medication having run out and her being certain of dying as a result is hands down one of the most heartbreaking things I’ve ever seen in a visual novel, even putting the painful ending of Emily is Away to shame in terms of nearly triggering the waterworks (I’m tough to make cry, but this almost managed it!).

The second part of the story is basically a prequel (although, bizarrely, it also includes a prologue within the prequel, focusing on another character entirely for 2 chapters...) focusing on the female patient from the first story remembering her time hanging out with a patient on the death ward. I think this story suffers a bit from deliberately trying to answer questions in the first part of the story in ways which don’t really make a lot of sense when you think about them hard enough, but, on the whole, it’s, again, a really touching story.

The only main problem I have with the story is that it doesn’t really have any interactivity, but I can see why that wasn’t done, as there’s not a lot of ways to add to the story and spin it off in other directions. There isn’t a lot of art in the visual novel, but what is there is excellently done, and the music and sound direction is just perfect.

It’s also an interesting visual novel in that you can play it with voice acting or without it. I deliberately didn’t access it, but I heard snippets in passing and I can attest that the voice acting is actually not that bad! Nothing exceptional, but it gets the job done nicely.

Really, there’s not a lot I can say about this visual novel that is negative. I think it suffers from a lack of replayability, but the story is so strong that I can’t even call that a problem: I really would play this visual novel a lot if it weren’t for the fact that I probably wouldn’t be able to read it more than once without crying. This is truly a gem among the visual novel scene, and I highly recommend it!

When Is It Fair To Criticise A Free Game?

OK, this is a bit later than I expected, but I finally have remembered to come back to this.

Some of you who read the site might remember in my review of Lamia Must Die that I mentioned that there is a very valid question of when it becomes fair to say a free game is a bad game and what to expect from a free game. After all, it’s a game you get for free, so you obviously can’t expect it to be on the same level of development as, say, Assassin’s Creed: Syndicate and, because most free games are often by developers who are starting out on their games development careers, it is very easy to take the viewpoint that a free game should not be judged by a critic.

My viewpoint? Well, I critique free games, so you can tell that I disagree with the last viewpoint. However, I feel I should take the time to try to explain my own personal stance on this debate, if only so my thoughts are as clear as they can be. After all, what I’m about to say might actually prove of interest.

Making a game at all is a process that is difficult to do well. This is something anyone who has worked on a single game before now would be able to tell you immediately, but, to give you a quick idea of what goes into making a game, you need to decide on an art direction, you need to code the game, you need to do bug fixing, you need to do playtesting, you need to consider the font and layout of everything inside the game itself, you need to get the game to run on a different combination of graphics cards, sound cards, operating systems...and that’s before you consider stuff like whether you’re going to have voice acting in the game, what the story of the game is (if you’re doing something which needs a story) and sourcing sound clips. Games development is a VERY difficult sector of work to get into, and gamers generally expect a lot from the final product due to how expensive the high profile games are. While sites like Good Old Games and stuff like Steam sales do make gaming a lot cheaper, it doesn't excuse the fact that a new game in the triple-A gaming scene can still cost around £50, and that's just for standard editions of games.

Needless to say, this is why most gamers tend to stick with the indie scene or video game sales, as spending that much on a game is not something most people can do unless they have a lot of disposable income or are a professional video game critic (in which case, they usually don’t need their money to buy a game unless they’ve been boycotted by a publisher, so the point is somewhat moot). You’d have thought the triple-A sector of gaming would have picked up on this by now, but, well, I can remember when a new high profile game cost about £30 back in the early 2000s, and the global economy was a heck of a lot better back then than it is now, so...yeah, clearly not!

Anyway, moving back a bit, free games are nothing new: even in my middle school (which was a bit behind the times because...well, this is Northumberland we’re talking about, which might as well be called The Land Which Parliament Forgot for all the attention that seems to be paid to it…), it wasn’t usual to see people playing games like Icy Tower and a tank battle game on the Internet for free and sites like Cheeky Monkey Games were somewhat common knowledge among the students. With the benefit of hindsight, most of the games on the sites were nothing special: they were fun time wasters and worked well, but, compared to what is going on in the independent gaming scene today, they were fairly primitive games. Some games were excellent, though: in particular, one free game I remember with fondness was a game which had remade Super Mario to allow you to play it with characters from other Nintendo franchises, like Contra, The Legend of Zelda and Mega Man. These free games were almost certainly made by people making their first games and putting them out there on the Internet and, in the vast majority of cases, with no major intent of turning them into a business.

Man, I sound like an old man at the moment…

Jumping forward to today, you can still see that same passion and desire in aspiring games developers today, it’s just easier to make games today (you can get game engines for a fairly small price or even special software to allow you to make an RPG like the Final Fantasy games or a visual novel) and it’s easier to be found (Steam is a good place to put a free game on due to it being among the most popular online distributors of video games, if not THE most popular). And that, ironically, is why I personally see no problem with critiquing free games now: with all of these resources now available to make games development so easy and so much information around the Internet to help you whenever you run into trouble with developing a game, there is really no excuse for a video game to be badly designed any more.

I do not say by this that one should treat a free game on the same level as a triple-A game: such an expectation would be flat out unfair! Instead, I say that a free game which is badly designed, uses unmodified assets from stores or stuff like that should be called out for it, albeit not in a malicious way. It is hard to put it properly, but think of it this way: the point of criticising these issues is to encourage an aspiring developer to put effort into doing it right in the future, not to scare them from games development forever. True, you will get those like Digital Homicide who will refuse to listen no matter what you say to them, but most indie developers will look at the feedback they get and take it on board (or, at least, won’t make a public fuss over someone critiquing their games). If you’re starting out with developing a game, it is very tempting to use pre-made assets to get the job done quickly, since it means you don’t have to worry so much about coding errors and whatnot and can focus on trying to make the game fun. However, the point of them (as any serious games developer will tell you) is to use them as the starting blocks for the game: effectively, they’re what you use in the game’s alpha (beta at the absolute latest) stage to check the game is properly running, then you put your own assets in to replace the pre-made ones. They’re kind of like rehearsals for a play: you usually show up to rehearsals wearing what you’re wearing and (at least in early rehearsals) carrying the script with you in one hand to read your lines from while following your role’s blocking, but you wouldn’t put that on a stage and call it a finished production. While the exact nature of the play depends on which school of theatre the play is being done under, a typical play (so, one you’ll usually see in a theatre and not stuff like Brechtian Theatre or Theatre of Cruelty...Google is your friend, dear reader!) will usually be noticeably different from a first rehearsal of a play because the actors will have their blocking, will have memorised their lines and will have costumes, props and sets to help enhance their performances.

Yeah, suddenly the theatre comparison doesn’t look so insane, does it?

However, all of this is still sort of dancing around the key question: when is it fair to criticise a free game?

Well, I feel that a free game should not be given a free pass for being a bad game just because it is free. What I would expect from a free game is a game that I will be happy to play for a few hours, has original assets (or, at the very least, that the assets used mix well together) and has the replayability necessary to prevent the game from being a “play once and forget about it” type of game. I also expect the game to actually be finished (which is why I don’t touch Early Access games unless they’re free...and, even then, I will probably not play it unless I really am out of options or the premise is one that I find interesting enough to justify playing it): if I’m playing a free game that isn’t finished, I will still call it out for not being finished. The ONLY exception is with episodic gaming, and even that will only work if I feel there has been enough of a story in each individual episode to make each episode a satisfying game in and of itself.

Obviously, you guys don’t have to be as strict as I am being. I have those standards because I critique free games and demand a lot out of them, but there’s nothing to stop you from enjoying a free game which doesn’t fall under that category. In fact, I would go further than that and ENCOURAGE you to play the free games I critique just so you can let me know if you feel I’ve been unfair to them.

In any case, a free game, to me, should not be given a free pass for being awful because it costs nothing. At the end of the day, a game which costs nothing is still a game: the cost of the game isn’t really a factor to the quality of the game, although it will affect your expectations from it. However, a quality release is still a quality release: I might not want to pay £60 to get Eternal Senia, but I would take that over Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 5 any day of the week, which I wouldn’t want to play even if I got it for free. Would love to see a digital release of the original game if that’s not happened, though…

No, seriously: I played the first Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater game while growing up. It was awesome and had a pretty great soundtrack as well! Might do a brief look at all of the artists who released songs on the soundtrack for that album in the New Year, now I think on it…

Anyway, digression and rambles aside, what I want from a free game is something which is at least going to keep me busy for a few hours and/or has enough replayability to keep me coming back to it. I will have to cite a game which isn’t free to explain what I want from a game, but the sort of game I look for is like Dawn of War: it isn’t necessarily impressive to look at graphically (the original game is over ten years old by this point!), but it has a lot to offer to it that will make you want to play it again and again, it has enough to make replaying it worthwhile (specifically applies to Dawn of War: Winter Assault onwards, as there’s no branching storylines in the original game’s story mode, although I guess the multiplayer makes up for that) and it bundles that all up in a high quality game that is fun enough to play that you feel like returning back to it. That’s not a complicated formula to nail down, really, and, while a free game might require some time and effort to pull it all together, it really can be done: Hearthstone has done it, Eternal Senia has done it, Team Fortress 2 has done it and Everlasting Summer has done it. You might notice that these games are highly regarded among their target audiences (above 90% on Steam in the case of the latter 3 and, well, Blizzard games are always very highly regarded anyway) and are all free games, so they are shining examples of how to do free games well to me. True, they had development teams in all but one case (Eternal Senia was mostly done by one guy), but they show how important it is to put time and effort into games and that being a free game should not be a sign of a lack of quality.

So, in a nutshell, I feel it is fair to criticise a free game for when it doesn’t do stuff right, but I feel that a more supportive tone should be given than the usual one that a lot of people do, especially if the developer has made it fairly obvious that they haven’t made a lot of other games in the past. Critiquing a game (as in, being a proper critic) that is free should also be fair because, well, you can say what the game does well and doesn’t do well, which, if you take the approach of being hard of the game, but put it through a supportive tone and style of writing and offer ideas to improve the game, can be FAR more helpful to an aspiring developer than you might think. However, a free game should not be defended with the excuse “Well, what do you expect from a free game?”, for it reinforces the belief that free games are always awful, which is completely untrue.

Free Video Game Review: The Secret of Tremendous Corporation

Note to blog readers: this article is a catch up of an article that was meant to go up on my site, https://nerdcircleonline.wordpress.com/. If you wish to continue reading articles by me, you might want to move over to reading the site, as the likeliness is that this blog isn't going to be updated after I've published the catch up articles over the next month. With that said, I will NOT be taking the blog down and I will make sure it stays online should I be informed that it is due to be taken down, so you do not have to move over to the site if you don't want to.

One of the things that I’ve learnt is that adventure games tend to not be my cup of tea. I’m not QUITE as harsh on them as, say, Yahtzee is, but I will freely admit that adventure games tend to leave me scratching my head about why people get the appeal behind them due to a few of the common threads about them being unimpressive to me. For starters, the ridiculously specific nature of some puzzles can easily grate on me because the solution runs on logic that often makes little-to-no sense when you think about it and the fact that the vast majority of adventure games often fall back onto the “only one solution to every problem” method of thinking (even if the solution is something as ridiculous as putting a carrot in a peephole to grab a ring and avoiding getting killed by having your eye burnt out by a laser you weren’t even told was behind the peephole) means that I tend to lose interest in them.

Still, I will admit that I can see the appeal behind it if you like this kind of thing, so I decided to give The Secret of Tremendous Corporation a shot. And, well...it didn’t change my mind on adventure games, although I won’t deny that it is a decent enough adventure game in its own right to warrant a playthrough if you like that kind of thing, which is all the more impressive when you realise the game was made in about 48 hours for a competition.

First of all, let me get the obvious comment out of the way: yes, the art style of the game is ridiculously simple. It goes for a hand drawn look that is somewhat reminiscent of what you see if you draw the whole game in pencil. While this probably isn’t going to be an automatic turn off if you like old fashioned graphics, it is worth noting that the art style is not going to wow anyone who has played any video game before now. Certainly, this is the part of the game I would have personally suggested the developers redo for the Steam release of the game, as the hand drawn style may make the game a hard sell for those who expect graphics more complex than your average scribbles on a sheet of paper. That said, it does make the game look distinctive (I’ve not seen a lot of games which use this sort of style even for cutscenes, let alone for the whole game), so make of that what you will.

I also will say that the puzzles do sometimes seem to be there to make a problem that needs to be solved which isn’t really necessary to do and which have solutions which don’t really make a lot of sense. The two main puzzles which spring out in this regard are fetching a newspaper from a shelf too high up to reach (why you would store a newspaper on a shelf that most people can’t reach is beyond me, but maybe it contains a fully completed crossword that the paper’s purchaser didn’t want someone to find before they submitted it off for a cash reward or something) which requires you to tie a book to a rope and cover it in chewing gum (because that’s totally not going to ruin the newspaper at all…) and opening a door by scraping a potato down into being a lockpick (I would point out why that doesn’t make sense, but you guys almost certainly are ahead of me on that one). I also find it a bit weird that the solution to a problem involves asking the receptionist for a code when, by all rights, she should not even know about the thing which requires the code in the first place, but I’m arguably nitpicking here.

The plot of the visual game is MAYBE a tad out there at points (a video game company able to make at least 10,000 games in a year is a bit hard to believe, even with the explanation offered by the game in the plot, and I find the idea of a secret company using a newspaper to place an advert for recruitment kind of ridiculous because it means that everyone who reads that paper will be able to spot the ad...potentially including people who are part of the same companies you are trying to bring down!), but, overall, there’s not a lot really wrong with the story. I think a few rewrites of the story to clear some of the more obvious plot holes would have helped improve the game a bit, but the core of the story, while cliche as all hell, is not bad. It isn’t going to win any awards for strong writing, but I at least found it fun, despite rolling my eyes like they were following the inside of a washing machine more times than I care to admit.

I suppose, if I put myself into the mindset of a old school adventure game fan, this is at least somewhat fun for a single playthrough. It’s lacking a bit of polish and it isn’t going to appeal to those who aren’t already fans of adventure games, but there’s nothing particularly wrong with it if you’re already a fan of this sort of game. It’s not personally for me, but, if you fancy giving it a shot and don’t mind a few logic issues, then there’s certainly far worse games out there.

Free Video Game Review: Soccer Manager 2016

Note to blog readers: this article is a catch up of an article that was meant to go up on my site, https://nerdcircleonline.wordpress.com/. If you wish to continue reading articles by me, you might want to move over to reading the site, as the likeliness is that this blog isn't going to be updated after I've published the catch up articles over the next month. With that said, I will NOT be taking the blog down and I will make sure it stays online should I be informed that it is due to be taken down, so you do not have to move over to the site if you don't want to.

Well, I really got fucked in the ass when I missed this week originally. Previous week was a wasteland of free games (that I had a reasonable chance of playing: I don’t speak Russian!), then this week gives me a football game and ONLY a football game. Which would be fine if it weren’t for two things:

1. I am not a football fan. At all. Seriously, there are very few things I’d want to do less than watch or play football by choice.
2. I used my “get out of playing a game I really don't want to play free” card last time, so doing it this time feels like a cop out.

So yeah, this week’s catch up review is VERY much a case of me playing a game I had no chance of liking. Still, I will admit that, if I did have to choose to play a football game, I’d much prefer to be the manager because I could at least view it as a strategy game of sorts. After all, when you think about it, how a football game works could be argued as being a bit like an RTS: you have to select the appropriate player to make it easier for you to push the ball into the opponent’s side of the field or stop the opponent from doing that and tactically move the ball towards the player best suited for moving the ball further in should you encounter an obstacle.

...Actually, when put like that, football doesn’t sound that bad. Doesn’t excuse the fact I find it boring as all hell to actually watch, but hey, a revelation is a revelation! Now if only they would combine football with death traps...actually, wait, that’s basically Blood Bowl in a nutshell. Dang it!

Incidentally, someone get Games Workshop to remake Blood Bowl. They did brilliantly with Space Hulk and I would kill for an opportunity to play it!

Anyway, back to Soccer Manager 2016. Long story short, it’s not a BAD game, but I think it’s fair to say that this is not a game to get introduced to football games to, as I ended up stuck on the first match because the game kept refusing to let me move on after I’d put the new player on (my player had been red carded) because it wouldn’t tell me how to change my tactics and nothing I clicked on told me what I had to do to make the change. This is probably a game that could do with some sort of tutorial to allow those unfamiliar with this type of game a chance to get the hang of things properly, as that seemed like a really stupid thing to get stuck on for over ten minutes (and only ended because I went “Fuck this, I’ve got better things to do with my time than stare at this screen and be unable to move forward because someone didn’t think to explain how to move through this screen properly!” and closed the game down...yes, I'm impatient, but can you blame me for getting frustrated when I hadn't been told at all how to move forward and was stuck on what should have been an easy screen to navigate as a result?).

I also don’t like the fact that the game feels more like a browser game than an officially released Steam game, as it even has the buttons one would expect to find if they were playing the game on a browser. I will admit that this is a bit of a nitpick, since there are some good browser games out there, but having the game open with a suggestion to play the game through Facebook when you opened it through Steam is not a great sign. I opened it through Steam, why would I want to also open it through Facebook?

Still, quality wise, there’s not a lot of criticisms I have with it. Sure, it’s a simple game in terms of design and aesthetics (if not especially newcomer friendly), but I could see this being a decent time killer if you can’t afford Football Manager 2016 and need your fix of football team managing. The fact the game has in game purchases is something I personally have to frown upon, but it’s not to the ridiculous extent that Frozen Free Fall: Snowball Fight was, so that’s something at least. I suspect I probably COULD have gotten into this game had it been more newcomer friendly, but, as someone who has only played one football game in his life (and that was on the Sega Genesis), it’s fair to say that I probably couldn’t have been further from the target audience of this game if I tried. Which I guess is a good sign on one level: if I’m saying that I might have found this game to my liking had it been laid out to suit a newcomer to this type of game when I usually find football so boring that I don’t even bother to keep track of the names of football stars (I can name a few, like David Beckham and Gary Lineker, but mostly because I’ve heard of them for non-football reasons than because I actually hold any real opinion on them), that’s kind of like saying that you don’t think Fire Emblem: Awakening is that bad when you usually hate JRPGs and turn-based strategy games.

So yeah, if you’re not a football fan, this game probably won’t change your mind at all. If you like strategy games and football, you might want to get a more intuitive game than this one if you’re not already used to playing these types of games, but it should be a decent time sink. That’s really the long and short of it.

Free Video Game Review: Everlasting Summer

Note to blog readers: this article is a catch up of an article that was meant to go up on my site, https://nerdcircleonline.wordpress.com/. If you wish to continue reading articles by me, you might want to move over to reading the site, as the likeliness is that this blog isn't going to be updated after I've published the catch up articles over the next month. With that said, I will NOT be taking the blog down and I will make sure it stays online should I be informed that it is due to be taken down, so you do not have to move over to the site if you don't want to.

One of the things that people will have noticed is that I tend to criticize free games for being too short. I know this might be a very unfair criticism on some levels (after all, free games aren’t designed with the intention of being huge games which will be played forever), but I also tend to do this in connection to a game that only has one ending as well, which I feel negates the issue a bit because these are games which are short and which offer little replay value. I guess you could say that I make this criticism not because I am demanding free games be huge expansive games, but because I like seeing a free game which actually has a long enough run time to keep you engaged for many hours and which offers enough variety that you don’t feel like you’re just doing the same thing over and over again.

One game which fills this category wonderfully is actually a visual novel I’ve been meaning to talk about for a while now: Everlasting Summer, a game by the Russian studio Soviet Games (the name’s kind of a giveaway). It’s also their first visual novel and they’re working on a second one at the moment titled Love, Money, Rock ‘n’ Roll (which is intended for release in the second quarter of next year). There wasn’t a lot of information about the company from when I did a search about them, so I asked them to quickly fill me in on the details (thanks, guys!).

They basically started out as users of a Russian messageboard (lichan.ru, if you’re curious: it’s changed its name since then to lichan.hk, but Russian speaking tech guys will probably be able to find the archive somewhere) aimed towards anime and other traditionally Japanese medium fans and the site had mascots made by site members (kind of like the Angry Marines from 1d4chan, I guess). There was a thread in 2008 where the idea of making a visual novel based on these mascots was brought up and it became very popular, so people willing to work on the idea were brought together to start working on it. There was a lot that changed behind-the-scenes involving team members dropping and joining the team, concepts changing, artwork being reworked and scripts being rewritten, but a final team came together and worked on the project. However, over time, the game started to distinguish itself from the “Ilchan mascots eroge” idea, so the game had its title changed to suit the change in direction, opting for Everlasting Summer. It was released in November 2013 and was eventually put onto Steam, with two free DLCs added to the game while it was there as well (and an English translation).

They talked a bit about Love, Money, Rock ‘n’ Roll as well, but I’m going to have to save that discussion for another time (likely when Love, Money, Rock ‘n’ Roll comes out, since I am curious to check it out). For now, though, let’s start talking about Everlasting Summer and why I have such a high regard for the game.

Everlasting Summer has a plot which is surprisingly complex, involving a character travelling back in time (sort of: it’s difficult to explain properly without spoilers) to a camp where everyone seems JUST off enough to make you (and protagonist Semyon) realize that there is something wrong about the place, but you can’t place why. As the story goes on, the story gets weirder from there, with the end result involving a mysterious figure who seems trapped in a time loop…

It’s not a story to think too hard about, basically. Still, by the standards of your average visual novel, it’s actually rather deep: there’s a lot thrown at you in it, but it is done well enough that you don’t feel overwhelmed by it. I could very easily picture this sort of game (with some adjustments) making for a fairly solid independent film, which is a good sign in my book!

The characters are all also very good. I think the only one which breaks with reality a bit is Yulya (a catgirl), but, well, this IS an anime visual novel, so it’s somewhat excusable in a “would have been more surprised if there wasn’t one” kind of way. I’m also wondering how the team got Miku into their game (I am not joking: she even LOOKS like Hatsune Miku and part of her character involves her being a good singer! Subtle...), but I get the feeling that I’m approaching things from the wrong perspective on that one, although I wouldn’t suggest showing the game to Crypton Future Media’s lawyers any time soon. I think, if I had to pick a personal favorite character, I would have to go for Slavya, but none of the characters are badly written at all. They might fall into the level of being stereotypes for some people, but I can’t say that I personally found the stereotypes to be a problem (plus, you kind of have to have characters in a dating sim which cover a lot of bases and don’t usually have the time and space to go into a lot of depth with the characters, so it’s arguably justified to have characters who seem a bit stereotypical in these types of games due to the nature of them).

The art style is where I find things get a bit iffy. The backgrounds are very well done indeed, but it’s with the characters themselves and the occasional picture that includes them as the main point where I feel things are let down a bit. It just seems a bit amateurish to me. Not bad, I should stress, but I’ve seen more professional looking artwork in other visual novels and this problem lets Everlasting Summer down a bit. I can’t complain too much in good spirit because it is a free game and originally started out as a game for forum characters, but, speaking as a critic, this is one of the areas where I would have expected better than I got.

Still, if there is one thing which I feel makes the game a good free game to play, it’s the sheer replay value of the game. This isn’t a game you will play once and everything will be the same, no matter what you do: there’s so many endings that you are almost encouraged to play it several times just to see them all, and getting all of them requires some genuine effort. It gets better when you learn that there’s actually a game inside the game (it’s basically a variant of Poker), which has consequences upon the whole game depending on how you do in it, so you do need some skill in the game if you want to get every ending. It’s not a major thing overall, but I like little touches like that, because it makes playing the game require some degree of skill aside of memorizing the appropriate option to get to the desired outcome.

As a quick note, I played the game as it was available upon Steam, which means that the adult content was not available in my copy of the game (it is easy to restore the adult content, as a quick search online will be able to point you in the right direction very quickly, but I opted not to do that while playing the game for this review). I don’t feel it detracted from the game at all, in all honesty, although I would certainly encourage people who want to play the game as intended to do so.

Overall, even in the censored version, I found Everlasting Summer to be a very enjoyable visual novel. Is it perfect? No. But it’s very well made and I have very few complaints overall, so make of that what you will and check it out if it sounds like your kind of thing!

Ronnie Radke Gang Rape Accusation: My Thoughts

Oh boy, this is gonna be unpleasant to talk about...

Let me start this article off by stressing this: I do not intend for anything that I say in this article to be victim blaming. I might not personally know anyone who has been raped, but I have read stories from people who have been raped explaining how awful the situation is to a victim. I find rape as a whole to be a disgusting thing that can have no justification, as nobody, no matter how unpleasant a person they are, deserves to be raped.

Similarly, I do not write this article intending it to be a defence of Ronnie Radke: beyond reviewing Falling in Reverse's most recent album for a website I do writing for (which I thought was a somewhat schizophrenic mess of an album, but still potentially enjoyable if you like pop punk and metalcore, if you're curious as to my opinion on it), I have never had to listen to anything he has been on and I have no intention of ever seeing his band live because I was simply not interested in them. If these accusations are indeed true, then I hope that he gets returned to prison and stays there for a long period of time, for anyone willing to commit rape (whether on their own or as part of a group activity) is not someone who should be allowed to walk freely among people or be seen as an idol by anyone.

With all of that said, let's get into this.

A recent story that has been in the news of the metal scene is that, on the 3rd of June, Ronnie and his bodyguard is claimed to have gang raped a woman (I will do what most of the media has not done and refuse to name her out of respect to her privacy) after Falling in Reverse's show in Salt Lake City, Utah. I will leave out the details of the victim's injuries (again, out of respect to the victim), but the basic gist is that she was apparently gang raped, during which time she was fighting back and, when those involved were done, they dumped her on the side of the road. The victim's posts mentioned that she had got a rape kit (I will be honest, I have no idea how readily available those are, so I'm going to have to assume that those can only be obtained after getting in contact with either the police or a hospital) and that those involved in committing the crime had been arrested by the police as the tour bus was leaving and had posted bail the morning after the event.

I have to say, that very last detail already seems a bit off to me. I'll admit, I don't know how the legal system works in the US (I'm British), but I'd have thought that you'd have had to be charged with something first to have to post bail. If I'm wrong, I'll accept my error and retract this whole point, but I can't help thinking that something doesn't add up with that detail. Bear with me for a second if I am wrong, because this still could be worth paying attention to: an allegation is not the same as being charged with something. If you've been charged with something, you would have to post bail to leave prison, but the news so far has only stated that it's an allegation, which could well mean the police did not find sufficient evidence to charge those involved. That does NOT mean it didn't happen (and a charge for the crime could indeed have happened and it's just not been communicated very well), just that they'd not need to post bail to leave if they weren't charged with the crime.

I also feel I must echo the sentiments of Coverkillernation with regards to his response to this and point out to the friend of the victim that telling people not to make jokes or start an open mic forum on the internet is not something that's going to happen, even if it's on something as serious as this. The sad truth is that, on the internet, there is no topic that is completely safe from having jokes made about it and there's no topic which will avoid having comments made connected to it that are sickening to read (even now, there are some parts of the metal scene where mentioning female vocalists results in horrific amounts of misogynistic comments and other comments that could potentially set off triggers to those who have PTSD from being raped in the past). While I get that some people just want to vent about stuff when something awful like this happens, it is not exactly a way to avoid people doing stuff like that: if anything, the fact they have to tell people not to make jokes or start talking about a friend being raped probably says more about the people who follow them than anything else! I would stop short of saying the friend should have just kicked the wall instead of venting, but, if you've been on the internet for any real period of time, you should probably be aware that sometimes, there are occasions when not talking about something where anyone can read it, no matter how serious it is, is actually the more sensible course of action.

I should stress, again, I'm not trying to victim blame and I certainly don't want people to get the idea that I'm saying "You should have kept your mouth shut" to the victim's friend: these are just my thoughts on this and I'm trying to give as balanced a view on it as I can.

With that said, we now have to look at Radke's side of this story. His side of things is that nobody connected to the band was arrested in Utah and that, while police were at the scene, they were called to the scene by someone connected to the band because someone was under the influence of something and the band were concerned about them. Thus far, evidence indicates that Radke is at least telling the truth on the first part, as the Salt Lake City Sheriff's Department has no record of Radke being held by them, but the Murray City Police Department (which Falling in Reverse's attorney stated were the ones actually called to the scene) have, at the time of writing (so this might well have changed while I was writing this), not provided any evidence in support of or against Radke's claims, so this could well be proven to be wrong.

Honestly, there are two things that I find strange about this side of the story (one of which is TECHNICALLY answered, admittedly). The first is that the fact Radke opted to release the statement only to AltPress is a VERY odd move. It's very likely that he didn't want it everywhere to avoid a lot of people finding out about it and minimising the potential for this whole thing to go nuclear, but the problem is that giving the statement to only one website could also be disputed as being a case that he does not want to be caught out by being proven to be lying. If Radke DID do it and had put out the statement on every website he could, then he'd be in a HUGE amount of trouble with the media when revealed to have lied. Considering Radke's not exactly got a good reputation due to his time in jail and two other incidents in the early 2010s, I wouldn't blame him for wanting to avoid the situation becoming big because most people wouldn't believe his side of things at all, but choosing to only give the statement to one website could be read into really badly.

The other one is that, in his statement, he does not directly acknowledge the crime that he has been accused of. Now, to be fair, he DOES say "[t]his isn't the first time people have taken it upon themselves to spread ugly, unsubstantiated claims about myself and my friends" in his statement, so it's obvious that he's including this incident alongside a few others in a general comment there, but I feel he should have acknowledged what he's been specifically accused of and directly stated that he didn't do it, as a case could be made that he didn't directly challenge the claim.

Ultimately, though, I can't say this is a situation that either side will walk out well from. If Radke is innocent, then the victim has brought a HUGE amount of trouble upon herself for several reasons: lying about a serious event which causes serious emotional distress to those who suffer from it, attempting (probably not deliberately) to take an innocent (in this case) man's liberty from him by using his bad reputation against him, wasting valuable police time, trying to ride off of controversy, sympathy and another person's fame to secure their own fifteen minutes of fame and exploiting popular opinion of rape to attempt to organise a witch hunt on an innocent man (OK, that one might be stretching it a bit, but seriously, do a search on what support is out there for male rape victims sometime, then consider how male rape is depicted in the media and compare both of those details to the same circumstances for female rape. You might be surprised at what you find...). However, Radke's reputation will forever be stained (remember, being accused of committing rape, even if you're later proven innocent of it, can SERIOUSLY damage your reputation among people due to people assuming that you did actually do it and just avoided going to court over it) and, with his previous reputation making it easy for people to go "There, you see, I knew he'd never changed!", there's a very good chance that Radke's career (and, by extension, Falling in Reverse's career) would take a huge hit, possibly even ending it.

If Radke is guilty, however, then, frankly, he is a horrific example of a human being who has proven that he does not deserve another chance in society. Rape of any sort is one of the worst things you can do to a human being and, if he did do it, then he does not deserve any place in society ever again. However, the victim will almost certainly be forever hounded by rabid fans for basically destroying Falling in Reverse and putting Radke back in prison, meaning that chances are that she's never going to hear the end of this matter, despite what she said being the truth. Even if that doesn't happen, she's going to have to live with the memory of what Radke (and the people with him) did to her for the rest of her life, and, from what I've read, it sounds like she's had stuff like this happen before to her, so chances are good that she might well have serious PTSD, suffer from depression and/or be suicidal, even before this incident.

What do I suggest everyone interested in following this do for now? Well, it's nearly half past two in the morning where I live and I need to go to sleep, so I'm not going to do anything myself, but I'd suggest that everyone reading this who is able to dedicate some time to following this avoid making any firm decisions on who is the one that's made this situation happen and wait to see what the police report from Murray Police says.

I fully intend to follow this article up with something a bit less serious than this once I've had some sleep and done my other stuff that I need to do, as I don't want to keep talking about serious stuff like this, so, if you do want to keep following the news on this story, then I have to urge you to look elsewhere, because I'm going to go back to doing my usual brand of stuff when I wake up.

Video Game Review: Rayman (Game Boy Color Version)

As amazing as this might sound to some people, one of my first ever exposures to video games in general was through the Game Boy Color. I had seen Game Boys around, I'd played on the original PlayStation a few times and I faintly remember playing The Logical Journey of the Zoombinis and the Hercules tie-in game on PC, but the first video game system I ever owned was the Game Boy Color. On that system, I distinctly remember playing three games regularly in my early childhood: Pokémon Yellow (which I still possess a working copy of, if you can believe that!), Sabrina: The Animated Series: Zapped! (which I mostly played because my sister was awful at it and she kept getting me to play it for it...although I will admit that I ended up taking a liking to it and ended up playing it a lot myself even once I'd got to the point when I was able to beat it in one sitting!) and Rayman.

With the benefit of hindsight, the companies that made of games have gone on to become some of my favorite companies in the gaming scene. Game Freak still holds a place in my heart for the Pokémon games (which I've not played since the release of Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen, although I fully intend to rectify that when I can), I was recently stunned to learn that the developers of Sabrina: The Animated Series: Zapped! are the same developers who would go on to create the Shantae games (WayForward Technologies, if you're curious), all three of which are games that I discovered very recently and hold in very high regard, and Ubisoft Montpellier, while still part of Ubisoft, has been very good at avoiding a lot of the behavior that Ubisoft in general has become known for in recent times and is also the provider of some excellent games that seem to result in Ubisoft Montpellier being the only part of Ubisoft that has a focus on producing high quality games over...well, whatever Ubisoft is focusing on today.

Yet we're going to have to throw that praise for Ubisoft Montpellier out of the window for now, because the division of Ubisoft that created the Game Boy Color port of Rayman is actually Ubisoft Milan. Like with the Montpellier branch of Ubisoft, Rayman was the first game of the company (although they only ported the game), but, unlike Ubisoft Montpellier, there's not really been a killer game unique to the Milan branch. It has developed (or, at least, co-developed) various Tom Clancy games, the PS2 and Microsoft Windows versions of Rayman M (Ubisoft Montpellier being in charge of the Gamecube and Xbox versions of the game) and most of the Just Dance games, alongside working on a few Assassin's Creed games (not Assassin's Creed: Unity, though), but there's been no game that the company has done on its own which has been an attempt to start up a franchise.

Now, to be fair, this is not necessarily a bad sign: many companies out there are known for making games in other series and nothing else, but have done such good jobs with them that it's hard to fault them for their hard work. However, you would be forgiven for suspecting that Ubisoft Milan is not the part of Ubisoft where making a new IP is a high priority.

Anyway, let's get started with this review!

One of the things that I do have to stress from the start is that, for a game on the Game Boy Color and adapting the art style of a VERY colourful game on a far more powerful console, Rayman actually looks pretty good. It's not a flawless representation of the artwork in the console version of the game, but you can recognise the first three stages and the fifth stage of the console version of the game in various stages in the Game Boy Color version of the game with little difficulty. Stages four and six don't make appearances in the Game Boy Color version, but that's still more than I was expecting to see in the Game Boy Color version.

So, art direction is fine. The difficulty is easier than on the console version of the game (which, if you've ever played the console version of the game, is probably a huge relief to learn!), but that doesn't mean the game is easy: some of the later levels can be difficult enough that you'll be sure to burn through at least a few lives before you get to the end of the game. This isn't covering the bonus level (which is unlocked if you find all of the electoons, but isn't part of the main game), which is pretty fiendish in the difficulty department.

The controls are mostly fairly self-explanatory and aren't difficult to get the hang of. The game is a lot nicer than the console version in terms of what powers it starts you off with (you don't have to learn how to grab ledges and punch like you do in the console version, but you don't learn how to run like you do in the console version either), so the game isn't as difficult when starting off by comparison.

If you know what you're doing with the game, chances are good that you'll be able to beat it in three to four hours. Luckily, the game has a password system, so, if you don't know the game very well or don't have the time to go through the game in one sitting, you've got that as an option. I'm honestly not entirely sure why a password system was used when a save option was available in games around the time the game came out (Pokémon Red and Pokémon Blue (or Pokémon Green, if you lived in Japan) had save features, although I will acknowledge that the Pokémon games are far simple than Rayman is), but that's a minor complaint, especially considering that you can now play the game on systems where you can save the game yourself (emulators on computers and the Nintendo eStore spring to mind).

The music of the game is...well, it's OK, I guess. It doesn't have the charm of the console version, but it's still OK.

As a side note, there are creatures and obstacles in the Game Boy Color version of the game that have not appeared in any other Rayman game to date. This is worth noting because some of them are actually quite interesting: in particular, there are rings which are capable of actually harming you if you just into them and there are giant amps which can propel you into the air. I'm really surprised that these have never appeared in a future Rayman game, as I think both of them would be able to provide some really interesting ideas for puzzles if utilised in a Rayman game now.

I think there's ultimately one question that needs to be asked: is this a valid alternative to the console version of the game now? After all, you can get the console version on everything the Game Boy Color version is available on, so is there a reason to get this aside from nostalgia? Honestly...no. I don't think the Game Boy Color version of the game is BAD (indeed, in many ways, it's quite good!) but, in this day and age, it's more a curiosity than anything else. That's not to say it isn't worth checking out if you're interested in it, but now, I'd say there's not a lot of point in hunting it down instead of the console version.

Musings & Other Ramblings: Do We Have Too Many Superhero Films Now?

So, I was doing my local radio show a while back and the presenter before me was talking about how much he enjoyed Avengers: Age of Ultron. I went on air and, while I was there, I had a bit of a ramble asking whether there were too many superhero films coming out now. While there, I went "Maybe I should make this into a blog post..." and did my show.

But I thought it was actually a very good idea for a discussion, so...yeah, I'm doing it now!

So, for those of you who have somehow missed this trend, let's give a quick recap of when superhero films started to be a big thing. Superhero films have actually been around since the comic industry has been around, technically, as some of the first superhero films were film serials (basically, short TV programmes). One of the first, Mandrake the Magician, actually came out in 1939, but Batman, Captain America and Superman had their own serials made in 1943, 1944 and 1948, respectively. However, as Sunday serials went into decline on TV and the comic books industry having to respond to accusations of their graphic crime and horror stories encouraging juvenile delinquency (during which prosecutors entered evidence involving a cover having a decapitated head that was claimed to have been published, but, in truth, had actually been edited already to remove some of the elements that had been shown on the version in the court), the idea of comic book films became less popular, with only Adventures of Superman (a TV show that had episodes compiled together for theatrical release) and Batman (which was basically like the first three Pokémon films in that it was basically a feature length episode of the show, with a larger budget to match) making any major impact. There was a Japanese superhero film in 1966 called Ogon Bat based on the 1930s superhero of the same name, but there wasn't really any major superhero stuff of note between 1952 and 1978.

What changed that? Superman.

Well, technically, it was Star Wars that encouraged the return of superhero films, as it was the surge of interest coming from that which encouraged studios to take a chance on superhero films again. However, Superman was the first really high profile superhero movie (despite having gone into production prior to the release of Star Wars: in fact, the film started being filmed about two months before Star Wars came out, only taking so long to be released because it was being filmed alongside Superman II, with the latter only being put on hold when it was about 75% of the way through filming) and certainly laid down the groundwork for what we would recognize as a superhero film today: taking itself as seriously as it could while still recognizing that it's not based on reality and can, as such, bend the rules a bit on what is realistic for the sake of telling an enjoyable story. While one could argue that superhero films have moved beyond what Superman did nowadays, it certainly was the superhero film that proved that superheroes could be big screen stars and later encouraged films to be made like Flash Gordon, Robocop, Swamp Thing, Conan the Barbarian and Supergirl throughout the 80s and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, The Phantom, Steel, Batman & Robin and Tank Girl throughout the 90s.

While most would point towards Batman & Robin (released in 1997) as the film which originally killed off the superhero genre, the honest truth is that the market was being over-saturated by superhero films and the failure of Batman & Robin happened to be the point when the general public finally had enough of them. That said, it wasn't the end of superhero films at all: in 1997 and 1998, two films were released based on comics by Marvel which would go on to spawn franchises, Men in Black (yep, that's really based on a comic!) and Blade, to say nothing of some lesser known superhero films like Steel, Spawn and Mystery Men (the first two from 1997, the last from 1999). That said, it can certainly be said that Batman & Robin highlighted many of the big problems that had started to form around superhero films at the time: they had become overly camp and impossible to be taken seriously, relying on effects to cover up the quality of the writing of the movies, which had gone NOTICEABLY downhill since the time of Superman.

However, there were really two films that brought the superhero film back to life (if you consider it to have died in the first place): X-Men (from 2000) and Spider-Man (from 2002), although you could argue that M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakable (from 2000) also had a hand in reviving the superhero movie and certainly could be regarded as the precursor to the trend started by Batman Begins in some regards (although, if you want to be completely accurate, the first superhero film which deserves the honor of being the first dark, gritty and violent superhero film is actually 1994's The Crow). Probably predictably, the successes of these two (or three, if you're counting Unbreakable as a superhero film) films caused a new boom of superhero films, some of which were good (Hellboy springs to mind) and some of which...weren't (The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and Catwoman spring to mind). It wasn't really a revival of superhero films per se, but superhero films certainly weren't impossible to track down between the release of X-Men and The Dark Knight (indeed, I remember seeing the first Fantastic Four film in cinemas, which was WAY before I started to be really interested in comic book stuff!).

However, it was probably in 2008 that superhero films had their first major surprise for people in a LONG time (even considering Nolan's Batman films proving that superhero films could be dark and gritty and still be fantastic films which didn't require you to know anything about comics to enjoy them!), for it was in 2008 that Marvel started what would become the Marvel Cinematic Universe with the release of Iron Man. This might not sound like a big deal now, but remember, in 2008, the idea of a shared universe for superhero movies was something that NOBODY had tried before: superheroes were assumed to live in their own planes of existence separate from each other in their own movies and the idea of them teaming up together for films was something reserved only for fanfic writers. Nobody had thought of getting Spider-Man to team up with the Fantastic Four or the X-Men in a film together simply because nobody had any idea whether it would work or not (although, in fairness, there was also the logistics behind it all which meant it was unlikely to happen anyway: different companies own different rights to different Marvel properties, which made making them team up difficult at best and outright impossible at worst, and DC had basically only had success with Superman and Batman up until then, both at different enough times to make getting them to team up a very dumb idea). After the success of Iron Man...well, most of you reading this probably know what happened next. We had The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor and Captain America in the lead up to 2012's Marvel's The Avengers (or Avengers Assemble if you live in the UK and Ireland) as phase 1 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, then Iron Man 3, Thor: The Dark World, Captain America: Winter Soldier, Guardians of the Galaxy and Avengers: Age of Ultron making up phase 2 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (with Ant-Man in July being the film closing off phase 2).

Now, some of you will have noticed the strong emphasis on Marvel's successes and will be thinking "Wait, what about DC?"

Well...there have been three failed attempts to create a DC Cinematic Universe, the first of which, surprisingly, dates back to 1998 (so yeah, DC technically were the first company trying to make a shared cinematic universe!). In the 90s, a plan was made to bring Superman back to the big screen in a film called Superman Lives and, as part of it, Michael Keaton was going to be brought in as Batman so that an attempt at starting up a shared cinematic universe could be made. The film spent a LONG time going back on forth on stuff before finally being cancelled, which is probably for the better, in all honesty: the plot for it, from what I've seen of it, looks like the film would have been even worse than Batman & Robin!

Also, Nicholas Cage was cast as Superman in this film and Will Smith was approached to be Superman when he dropped out. Let that sentence speak for itself...

Anyway, in the early 2000s, the idea continued on, with J. J. Abrams being hired to write a screenplay for a film named Batman vs. Superman. This film was later cancelled in order for Warner Bros. to focus on doing individual Superman and Batman films, which was definitely the right decision if you think about it, but, having glanced through the plot summery for this film, I have to say that I'm actually disappointed that this film wasn't made, because the plot is actually pretty interesting and makes their return, despite a long period of time when both weren't on the big screen, actually make some degree of sense.

Also, funny side note: one of the people who was approached to be Superman for this film? Christian Bale. Yep: Christian Bale could have been Superman as well as Batman (as he was being considered for the lead role of an adaption of Batman: Year One at the time as well)!

It would take until 2011 for the next attempt to make a shared cinematic universe to happen, and it started in the place that most wouldn't have expected it to, for it wasn't a Batman film or a Superman film that was going to be the starting point of a DC Cinematic Universe, but it was going to be through the success of Green Lantern that the next film, The Flash, would start off a shared cinematic universe. The failure of Green Lantern ended that plan very quickly, but, speaking as someone who found the film decent (not great, but not awful!), I have to say that it actually would have made some sense for Green Lantern to have started off the DC Cinematic Universe had it been successful. While the scale of the film arguably would have made later films feel less grand by comparison, the arrival of Parallax could have been used to explain why many human characters got superpowers, as they could have been involved in trying to create methods on Earth to counter a later attack by beings like Parallax, and would have explained the arrival of alien heroes like Superman and Martian Manhunter to Earth, as they could have come to Earth intending to help protect it from Parallax's attack only to arrive after the conflict had ended. There was potentially a very good idea there that, unfortunately, was never to become reality.

The current attempt at creating a DC Cinematic Universe was through 2013's Man of Steel, which is currently still going ahead. Now, I've still not watched Man of Steel, so I can't comment on the quality of it, but what I've seen of the upcoming plans for the DC Cinematic Universe indicates that DC is making a mad rush to ensure that it can catch up with Marvel, as it's making the next film be a crossover with Superman and Batman (who isn't the same Batman from Nolan's Batman films) and will feature Wonder Woman, Cyborg and Aquaman in the film, none of whom have had any live action appearances in films before now. I will be polite enough to reserve judgement for now, but I'll be honest, I don't see this attempt to start off a DC Cinematic Universe resulting in anything except for a bunch of films ranging from decent to awful in quality, because I can't imagine this having had any major thought behind it beyond "Marvel have their own cinematic universe? Let's make our own cinematic universe!"

Think all of THAT is confusing to keep track of? Well, you've got even more to keep track of, because I've still got the X-Men, Fantastic Four and Spider-Man franchises (it's technically defunct now, but I've got to talk about it to help give context on it all) to talk about and I've not even mentioned the Valiant Cinematic Universe which got announced a few months back, let alone started to talk about other superhero films from other companies and completely original superheroes who never started from comic books...

OK, I think I've actually rambled enough! You may start to notice why I asked that question in the title now: are we now having too many superhero films coming out? Is history doomed to repeat itself and are superhero films going to die off due to overexposure?

Well, it's really tough to say. On the one hand, superhero films never really died in the first place. Sure, Batman & Robin caused such a backlash against superhero films that it took a bit for superhero films to really make a proper comeback, but, considering Men in Black and Blade were technically superhero films, it wouldn't be right to say that superhero films were dead after the release of Batman & Robin. That said, the fact of the matter is that there are A LOT of superhero films coming up in 2016 (2015 is actually pretty quiet: the only two films coming up at the minute that are going to be of much notice to most people are Ant-Man and the Fantastic Four reboot!). At the time of writing, here are the confirmed films from all of the franchises I've mentioned thus far for 2016:

• Deadpool (February 2016) 
• Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice (March 2016)
• America: Civil War (May 2016) 
• X-Men: Apocalypse (May 2016)
• Suicide Squad (August 2016)
• Gambit (October 2016)
• The Sinister Six (November 2016)
• Doctor Strange (November 2016)

Again, that's just confirmed films from the superhero franchises I've mentioned thus far: there's a very good chance that list could get longer! 8 films not look like much on paper, but then remember that there's other films coming out in 2016 (Star Wars Anthology: Rouge One is due in December 2016, for example) and you're going to have to hope that very little comes out at the cinema in 2016 that you really want to see! And that's not all: there's the TV series about various superheroes like Daredevil and The Flash, there's TV series connected to those films like Gotham and Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and there's talk of having animated films connected to the MCU, so it's very easy to get sick of seeing superhero stuff popping up everywhere! Heck, I felt drained just listing all of that and I'm enthusiastic about superhero stuff!

Oh yeah, and, if you're think it's going to be better in 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020, then here's the confirmed films for those years as well:

2017

• Untitled Wolverine film (March 2017)
• Guardians of the Galaxy (May 2017)
• Untitled Spider-Man film (June 2017)
• Wonder Woman (June 2017)
• Fantastic Four sequel (June 2017)
• Thor: Ragnarok (November 2017)
• Justice League Part One (November 2017)
• X-Force (no confirmed date, but likely late 2017)
• Female-led Spider-Man spin-off film (no confirmed date, but likely 2017)
• Venom Carnage (no confirmed date, but likely 2017)

2018

• The Flash (March 2018)
• Avengers: Infinity War Part 1 (May 2018)
• Black Panther (July 2018)
• Aquaman (July 2018)
• Captain Marvel (November 2018)

2019

• Shazam (April 2019)
• Avengers: Infinity War Part 2 (May 2019)
• Justice League Part Two (June 2019)
• Inhumans (July 2019)

2020

• Cyborg (April 2020)
• Green Lantern (June 2020)

Yeah...bear in mind, Valiant haven't announced a single film yet, I've not counted anything outside of Marvel, DC, Fantastic Four, X-Men and Spider-Man (so, no independent films, no films from companies like Image, Dark Horse and the like and no reference to films which are all original characters) and there's a good chance that the X-Men, Spider-Man and Fantastic Four franchises are going to announce more films in the next few months (the X-Men, at the very least, will), so that list? That is DEFINITELY going to get longer!

That sound was your wallet screaming in terror.

The big question that I've not answered, however, lies in the title of this article: do we have too many superhero films now?

As odd as this might sound in light of the last bits of information I've provided, I don't think we do. Sure, we have A LOT of superhero films scheduled to come out and the list is still going to get longer, but, on the other hand, there are a lot of comic book properties out there and, if all of them were to be made for the big screen, it would take many decades, if not centuries, to cover all of them. I'm not even talking of obscure titles here or characters most people don't want to remember, like the New Guardians, Black Cat or the Fixer: we've got comic book characters like Supergirl, the Teen Titans, Nightwing and Martian Manhunter which haven't been given a look into yet, comic book characters like Daredevil, Elektra and Ghost Rider who are in need of a more faithful take on their source material on the big screen, characters like Hellboy and Blade who have been off of the big screen for long enough that a new take on them might be appreciated and characters like Spawn and the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen who...well, just need a film made about them that isn't as awful as their last outings were!

What IS indisputable, though, is that there's far too many of these films coming out over a small period of time and that, with so many of them either being sequels or have interconnected continuities with each other, it isn't entirely unreasonable to say that it's difficult for people new to everything to have to catch up with everything (I got introduced to the Marvel films before Avengers Assemble came out and even I'll admit that I found watching five films in a short period of time a bit daunting, so I can understand how apprehensive some people would be about watching eleven films in a small period of time, especially if you want to watch them all before seeing Ant-Man!) and people who aren't interested in superhero films will have a very valid reason for going "God, is that ANOTHER fucking superhero movie?" when the influx in them ramps up from next year. The over-saturation is a very valid concern, for it looks suspiciously similar to what happened between the late 70s and the late 90s in terms of what happened with the quantity of superhero films coming out (if anything, I'd argue it's worse now!) and, while there is a far greater appreciation for quality than there was back in that period of time, over-saturation of a quality product is still over-saturation, at the end of the day.

That all said, however, I do not think that the general public has completely tired of superhero films just yet and part of me is glad of that fact. It isn't exactly "cool" to be a geek these days (I think most people would still look at trading card games, role play games or tabletop wargames as being territory only for weird losers with no lives of their own...), but now, people are starting to get why geeks like the stuff they do thanks to stuff like Guardians of the Galaxy, The Dark Knight Rises, Big Hero 6, The LEGO Movie, Wreck-It Ralph and The Big Bang Theory being popular and involving stuff that is usually labelled as geeky and, as a result, there's more appreciation for just why these hobbies are so interesting. In a strange way, I almost feel proud to be a geek now, not because I'm now having the last laugh on those who looked down upon me for my hobbies in school, but because it's encouraging to see people finally starting to realise that all of the stories passed down about gamers, comic book fans, otaku and the like being strange people who are best avoided are just that: stories.

...Well, OK, maybe The Big Bang Theory isn't helping as much as it should do on that front, but points for effort, I guess, as it does encourage viewers to look up the stuff being talked about whenever they don't get the references and does show that geeks come in more shades than most works usually show!

I think, at the end of the day, the abundance of superhero movies is a valid concern to those not in the know about comic books, as there's only so many times you can see what looks like a person in a silly costume before it gets tiring to keep seeing it again and again, but, for comic book fans, this turn in the market is a nice change that they will continue to enjoy while it lasts. Do I expect the rivalry between the fans of all of the movie universes to ever die off? Not in the slightest: Marvel and DC, for instance, run on very different plans (even down to the receptions of their heroes by civilians in their respective universes) and those appeal to people for very different reasons. But those reasons don't stop the fact that, at the end of the day, the important thing isn't the rivalries, but it's the films that get made and the quality of them.

Whether DC understands that or not is up for debate, but that isn't important: so long as the films are enjoyable, I have no major issues with superhero films being popular! My wallet might disagree with me on that one, though...

Video Game Review: Kirby Fighters Deluxe

I'm going to be very honest, I first picked up Kirby Fighters Deluxe because I noticed a sale of Kirby games on the Nintendo eStore involving the first two Kirby's Dream Land and I figured I might as well pick this up as well (since, well, it would cost less than £10 to pick up all three games, which I didn't think was a bad offer!). I didn't know what the game was at all: I just thought "Kirby? AWW, IT'S SO CUTE! YES, PLEASE!" and picked it up right away.

...Yes, I find Kirby adorable. Don't judge me!

Anyway, I did some research and it turned out that Kirby Fighters Deluxe is an enhanced version of one of the modes available on Kirby: Triple Deluxe. Having not played the game the mode is originally from, all I can do is use the internet to check information on it and it turns out that there's a few extra features added to the mode, but there's a stage locked from stage selection and two classes (Beetle and Bell) locked from selection unless you have save data from Kirby: Triple Deluxe on your Nintendo 3DS. Since I don't have that, I can't comment on that content, so this review is of the game is of the base game (so, purchased without being able to access the extra content).

So, with that out of the way, let's get started!

One of the first things to notice about Kirby Fighters Deluxe is that it's basically a Super Smash Bros. clone. I've even played Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS to check how it plays in comparison to that and the controls are very similar to that game. This is likely to be a coincidence on the control scheme front (bear in mind, while Nintendo are a developer of games, they're a HUGE company, so not everyone is going to be working on the same games, and they're also a publisher of games, so there's third party companies releasing games on Nintendo systems which have no members connected to the first party Nintendo games being released), but the fact the game is basically Super Smash Bros. with a focus on Kirby is a minor point of criticism, as it's hardly the most original of games in that aspect.

In fairness, it WAS originally a bonus mode for another game, so I can't be too harsh because it was unlikely to have been the main focus of the game development time, and it's being sold for a fairly cheap price (full price on the Nintendo eStore at the time of writing is £6.29), so it's not like you're going to make a huge loss from purchasing the game. This doesn't, however, negate another criticism I have of the game: you can tell that the assets are basically from Kirby's Return to Dream Land (well, specifically, they're from Kirby: Triple Deluxe, but, if you've even seen gameplay from Kirby's Return to Dream Land, you'll notice the assets are basically the same for that game as they are here), so you get the feeling that the game, while not rushed per se, didn't have the same focus as some of Nintendo's other properties that were being released when this was did. I don't mean that this makes the game bad (the vast majority of first party Nintendo games are at least enjoyable games), just that you would be forgiven for thinking that this game was made more as a stop gap between Kirby games than as a proper Kirby game (which is not helped by the fact that the Kirby game before this one, Kirby's Dream Collection, was a compilation of six of the early Kirby games and the one after this one, Kirby and the Rainbow Curse, was released about a year after Kirby: Triple Deluxe in most countries!).

Whether this recycling of assets is a major problem or not does not, however, impact the fact that the game looks beautiful on the Nintendo 3DS. While you'll probably not notice most of the art direction due to focusing on fighting your opponents, it's certainly a very colorful looking game and it manages to avoid making the large color scheme look garish as well. It's very nicely done, so huge credit to everyone involved in the art direction for the game: you've done a wonderful job here!

Moving to the gameplay itself, you basically have three modes as part of the game: single player, local multiplayer (there's no online multiplayer for this game) and training (which is basically offline multiplayer). I'm not going to cover multiplayer, as I've not been able to play it (the joys of being the only person among your group of friends who regularly has his Nintendo 3DS on him...), but I can comment on the single player and training modes, so I'll do them separately.

In single player, you select which class of Kirby you wish to play as (which also includes alternative costumes, if you beat any of the difficulties with the appropriate class of Kirby for the new costume), select the difficulty of the game (you get a choice between easy, normal, hard and very hard) and go into it. Nothing too complicated here and, even in the base game, you get ten classes available to you (specifically, Sword, Cutter, Beam, Parasol, Hammer, Bomb, Whip, Archer, Fighter and Ninja), with Beetle and Bell available if you have save data from Kirby: Triple Deluxe on your Nintendo 3DS (and have StreetPass on: apparently, it doesn't detect the save data if you have StreetPass off). They all play fairly differently from each other, too, although not enough that you'll not be able to work out the basics of what each class on your first use of them.

The single player is basically a series of nine battles, seven against other classes of Kirby and two sort-of boss battles. For the standard battles, I do think that the difficulty of the Kirby battles seems a bit oddly decided (for example, the first battle is a one-on-one fight, while the second battle is a two-on-one battle, with YOU having the ally) and the fact that the game doesn't set up some of the battles properly is a bit concerning (there's clearly occasions where the game is MEANT to have teams going up against you, but makes the battle a free-for-all instead, which means that the CPU opponents will sometimes deliberately attack each other instead of you), but the overall single player for the game is still enjoyable and you'll probably be able to have a lot of fun with them if you like this style of game. Just be aware that, on higher difficulties, your opponents get ruthless, so I'd suggest you start on the highest difficult ONLY if you're know the controls for the game already. Don't jump into the highest difficulty blind to the actual controls to the game!

The two sort-of boss battle occur in stage 5 and stage 9. For stage 5, you face Kracko (the cloud with an eye, for those who don't know the names of various Kirby characters). I honestly think this boss battle is a bit too easy on lower difficulties, since you have a second Kirby alongside you which makes it possible for you to win the battle without fighting Kracko yourself, but the higher difficulties rectify this by not only making Kracko go through his moves far quicker, but also making him deal more damage to you. Even if you're an expert dodger, you're going to have to contribute to the fight on higher difficulties because the second Kirby will be beaten very quickly if you try to leave the boss fight to them on their own! For stage 9, you fight King Dedede...sort of. See, the boss fight starts out with you fighting waves of mini versions of him that mostly get defeated in one or two hits (which you have to face a larger number of on higher difficulties), then you finish by fighting two smaller versions of him (not the mini ones you fight in waves before that, but still recognizably smaller than him) and King Dedede himself. This last fight gets interesting in that, if you defeat the smaller versions before you defeat Dedede himself, he will grow to twice his size (paging Dr. Freud...) and get a far more powerful set of moves which, on higher difficulties, can be ruthless if you're not prepared to deal with them. I like both boss fights, but I will admit that it feels a bit disappointing that the final fight wasn't purely a one-on-one brawl against King Dedede himself, without the other versions of him being there to make things more difficult.

The training mode is basically an opportunity for you to play Kirby's multiplayer offline against the CPU. You can play against up to three opponents, with you selecting their difficulty and their class. You then can chose stuff like handicaps that you want to have in place. It's only once you do that that you have the option to decide teams, which I feel is a very poorly thought out method of making the option of teams available: I actually spent a good amount of time the first time I tried to set up a team game trying to find the option for multiplayer because I thought it was going to be on the main menu like with most games. You do have the option, however, of putting all three opponents on a team against you, which isn't done in the single player! You then select the stage you want to fight upon (one of which isn't available without access to saved data from Kirby: Triple Deluxe) and then battle. Aside from the layout for multiplayer team battles being a bit awkward to get used to, it's fairly good fun and certainly a good opportunity to practice if you want to play against friends!

The music and sound for the game is something I've not commented upon. Honestly, this is because I usually play the game with the volume off, but what I heard whenever I had the volume on was very good! I will admit to getting a bit nostalgic when I heard the music from the first stage in the single player matches, as it's a remix of the music from the first stage of Kirby's Dream Land, and the victory music whenever you win a match never failed to bring a smile to my face due to it being a remix of the victory music that's been ever present in the Kirby games.

The classes are all pretty well balanced against each other. I personally favored Sword and Hammer for my classes whenever I played and preferred to avoid Bomb, but, for the most part, I found every class to be very well balanced and enjoyable to use. A few classes could have been slightly better balanced (I think Hammer's attacks in general are a bit TOO powerful and I found Bomb a bit underpowered due to how difficult it is to make attacks actually hit your opponent short of placing the actual bomb on top of them), but all of the classes have their strengths and weaknesses which make playing them all fairly interesting!

What do I think the game could do better? Well, the only game mode that you have in terms of multiplayer options are stamina battles, where you have a life bar and, when that runs out, you are defeated. While you do have the ability to return as a ghost if defeated and, if you deal damage as a ghost while there's an opponent on the battlefield you can damage, you revive with some health, that's the only method of playing the game, which means that the game will get fairly repetitive very quickly due to the lack of options to customize games.

I also find the locking off of content purely to those who have access to Kirby: Triple Deluxe to be a somewhat aggravating decision, because it's basically locking off content that should be available to people from the start and also is a method of encouraging people who already have Kirby: Triple Deluxe to have to spend more money on what is basically part of a game they already own. While spending an extra £6.29 isn't too bad if you own Kirby: Triple Deluxe, the game still sells for £34.99 on the Nintendo eStore, which is a bit much if you're only buying it to get access to the two locked classes and the locked stage! I think a sensible idea would be to either make the two classes and stage available to those who own Kirby Fighters Deluxe on its own or, if Nintendo does want to stick with the locked content option, allow for a discount on the game to those who already own Kirby Fighters Deluxe and/or Dedede's Drum Dash Deluxe (which is another game that is a side game in Kirby: Triple Deluxe, but is not one that I've played).

Ultimately, if you and a bunch of friends meet up regularly for gaming and you all can't afford Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS to play against each other, this is a pretty respectable substitute for it if you're fans of Kirby and it's certainly a game that is fun enough to be worth a play on its own. It is flawed in that the lack of variety means it will wear thin fairly quickly and most people will probably be frustrated by the locked off content, but it's certainly a decent time killer!